If I seem to be putting down random stuff it's because I am. I'm just putting down what occurs to me to help form my thinking on what to put into a submission. So sometimes it's serious, others trivial.

As a regular user of camp sites in the Grampians, I can assure you that this isn't going to work.

Your revenues will not meet the cost of collecting the fees so you will have to put up the price to $100 in an attempt to cover your outlay on payment systems. That will make you look silly.

If these fees are implemented, everyone in my regular group will ignore the official camp sites and camp in the bush. The ranger presence is minimal and there is plenty of space out there to get away from it all.

Your job is to look after the National Parks on behalf of the nation. Please concentrate your limited resources on park maintenance rather than trying to generate funds from visitors.

On 29/10/2013 kieranl wrote:
"Assets associated with these facilities and services>will be revitalised, rejuvenated and renewed and better facilities and>services will be provided. Visitors will enjoy a better experience">
I get it now - it's like the grandiose plans they had to make money out of Arapiles a few years back. They hope to add hot showers and cushy facilities to Stapylton/Buadick etc, charge more for them and turn them into PV cash cows like Tidal River and Catani. They might need to put a swimming pool in as well.

On 29/10/2013 Wendy wrote:>>>I get it now - it's like the grandiose plans they had to make money out>of Arapiles a few years back. They hope to add hot showers and cushy facilities>to Stapylton/Buadick etc, charge more for them and turn them into PV cash>cows like Tidal River and Catani. They might need to put a swimming pool>in as well.
No I think it's more like :

On 30/10/2013 JamesMc wrote:>Better to write to your local member. They are the ones concerned about>loosing their seats.
My local member isn't. Safest conservative seats in both federal and state politics.

On 30/10/2013 pcb wrote:>On 29/10/2013 kieranl wrote:>>No I think it's more like :>>>>They hope to charge more for them and turn them into PV cash cows.>>Or they hope to make commercial developments within National Parks more>attractive for investors by to removing low cost accommodation options.

On 30/10/2013 james wrote:>that article is 6 months old & the gov't has changed since then....
The federal government has changed but it is not the government in question.
The Napthine government was elected 3 years ago, is still in power, and it is the government responsible (if that's the right word) for the national and state parks in Vic.

... the Government will also consider a camping pass for dispersed camping and some basic/very basic campgrounds. This will ensure users pay for the ongoing management of these areas, including the associated access tracks. Similarly, camping fees will be considered for forests and other areas of public land to ensure camping across all public land is sustainable. Just as for parks and reserves, managing camping areas in forests and other public land incurs significant costs to the state ...

So, it's not just national parks and not just campgrounds but eventually all camping in all areas.

Odd that this is labelled a proposal and is open for comment... The Pines has an updated sign that says $5 a night, Catani has already gone up to about what they are proposing in this release... I wonder if other sites have already gone up too?

On 8/11/2013 ajfclark wrote:>Odd that this is labelled a proposal and is open for comment... The Pines>has an updated sign that says $5 a night, Catani has already gone up to>about what they are proposing in this release... I wonder if other sites>have already gone up too?

Now that the Arapiles 50 climbing forum and events celebrations have passed and my work schedule is easing back to normal, I will be posting some comments on this shortly. Most important thing to note though is that people - as in as many as possible - need to make submissions to it. If everyone complains but no-one makes submissions, it means nothing and it will surely go ahead.

The current price increase at various campgrounds is the usual annual CPI increase and not what they are talking about when they are talking about the camp fee increase proposal. The annual increases will occur as per usual. We just never noticed it at Araps because we were stuck in a bit of a lucky camp fee time warp. Also, the Araps campground, due to the changes that were implented a short time ago - differentiating it from other campgrounds - will not fall into the same category regarding site prices. It works on a per user basis now. If this changes in the future, then I would imagine, it would again fall into the same category. For now Arapiles is safe from the exorbitant price hike. The Grampians and other climbing focused parks are not however.
This price change needs to be challenged - strongly - if you don't want to see it implemented.

I put in a submission when it first came out and I haven't even got am acknowledgment from them.don't let that discourage anyone from writing one though. Or blockading a campground or some other form of entertaining protest.

On 9/11/2013 access t CliffCare wrote:>The current price increase at various campgrounds is the usual annual CPI increase and not what they are talking about when they are talking about the camp fee increase proposal.

Sorry Tracey, that doesn't float at Lake Catani:

2011: $22.50
2012: $23.00
2013: $24.00
2014: $31.40

2012 was a 2% increase which is in the ballpark of CPI. 2013 was about 4% and again in the ballpark.

2014 is about a 31% increase. That's nowhere near CPI but it does make the price pretty well inline with their proposal.